ナイジェリアの環境持続可能性に向けた資金調達メカニズムとしての生物多様性クレジットと炭素市場：政策・研究レビュー

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:途上国における炭素・生物多様性クレジットの制度設計と高整合性基準の実証的空白を示す。

🏢実務担当者:新興国でのオフセット調達や自然資本関連投資の際のホスト国ガバナンス・MRVリスク評価に活用できる。

🏛政策担当者:炭素市場と生物多様性ガバナンスの調和およびMRV能力構築の政策設計の参考になる。

Nigeria loses forest at a scale measured in the tens to hundreds of thousands of hectares every year, and its wetlands, savannas, and marine ecosystems face mounting pressure from land-use change, extractive activity, and population growth. At the same time, two rapidly evolving global finance instruments — carbon markets and biodiversity credits — are increasingly discussed as complementary mechanisms for mobilizing private and public capital toward environmental sustainability. This paper examines the state, potential, and constraints of both mechanisms as financing tools for Nigeria's environmental sustainability agenda. Drawing on primary policy documents (the Climate Change Act 2021, Nigeria's 2021 Nationally Determined Contribution, the Energy Transition Plan, the Carbon Market Activation Policy, and Nigeria's NBSAP 2025–2030), official data (FAO's Global Forest Resources Assessment, Global Forest Watch, and the CBD Online Reporting Tool), and peer-reviewed literature on REDD+ effectiveness and biodiversity credit integrity, the paper traces the evolution of Nigeria's carbon market architecture — from the Cross River State REDD+ pilot to the 2024 Carbon Market Activation Policy — and situates it alongside the nascent global market for voluntary biodiversity credits, in which Nigeria's 2025–2030 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and the newly launched Biodiversity Finance Initiative represent early institutional footholds. The analysis finds that while Nigeria possesses substantial ecological assets — including the Cross River rainforest block, the Niger Delta mangrove complex, and a network of national parks covering about 3% of its land area — it faces significant governance, measurement, and market-access constraints that limit its ability to capture value from either mechanism at scale. Recent peer-reviewed evidence further cautions that REDD+ impacts to date have been positive but modest, and that most biodiversity credit suppliers do not yet meet high-integrity criteria, implying that Nigeria's institutional choices now will shape whether either mechanism delivers credible, lasting benefit. The paper concludes with policy recommendations for strengthening monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, harmonizing carbon and biodiversity governance, and building the domestic institutional capacity needed to convert Nigeria's natural capital into credible, investable environmental assets.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.54117/ajceir.v3i1.197first seen 2026-10-22 04:54:55 · last seen 2026-11-06 04:55:05